ABUJA — The African Democratic Congress (ADC) Presidential Campaign Council has accused the Federal High Court of withholding a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu, despite the party’s lawyers having paid for certified true copies. The council is demanding the immediate release of the document to allow affected parties to understand the ruling and exercise their right to seek legal remedies.
In a statement issued on Monday, Phrank Shaibu, the Director of Strategic Communication for the ADC-PCC, stated that counsel for the first and third defendants had applied for the certified copies, with both applications bearing the court’s official “PAID” stamp. According to the council, the application for the third defendant was submitted on November 5, 2026, the day the judgment was delivered, while the application for the first defendant was filed on November 6.
Shaibu criticized the delay, noting that Justice Lifu had declared in open court that copies of the judgment were ready. “If the judgment was ready, there is no excuse for keeping it from the parties. Release it now,” the council demanded. The ADC-PCC described the situation as a denial of access to justice, arguing that litigants should not be forced to struggle to obtain documents necessary to challenge a ruling.
“A judge cannot announce that a judgment is ready and leave litigants to chase the document they need to understand and challenge it,” Shaibu said.
The council warned that the case, which involves the leadership of a major political party and the rights of its members, carries implications beyond an ordinary administrative dispute. It argued that withholding the judgment could undermine public confidence in the judiciary. The ADC-PCC also questioned the timing of the judgment, alleging that its delivery days after the party’s Sokoto campaign launch raised suspicions about the proceedings.
Additionally, the council revisited its earlier objection to Justice Lifu presiding over the case. Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola, the party’s National Secretary, had previously questioned the judge’s impartiality, citing appellate decisions that the party believes raised concerns about his competence and neutrality. The ADC-PCC stated that the failure to release the judgment has further heightened these concerns.
The council vowed to explore every lawful avenue to obtain the judgment and challenge the ruling. It demanded an explanation for the delay and accountability for those responsible, asserting that the public is entitled to know whether the process was judicial or a calculated attempt to deliver a political blow while denying the party the means to contest it.
<small>Source: Vanguard News — read the original story there.</small>
